Author Topic: PGA Championship (Read 3738 times)

sporadic · « **on:** August 11, 2011, 11:25:51 am »

Anyone watching live stream of the "featured group". Three years ago would you have ever thought that Davis Love III would be the premier player in a Love/Woods/Harrington threesome? The side by side of Tiger circa 2004 to Tiger today was remarkable. Foley is a complete dipshit, how a PGA tour pro would allow him within 100 feet of them is beyond me.

austro · « **Reply #1 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:26:32 am »

What the hell happened to Ishikawa?

sporadic · « **Reply #2 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:27:10 am »

Quote from: austro on August 11, 2011, 11:26:32 am

What the hell happened to Ishikawa?

The last four holes on that course can create some serious carnage.

austro · « **Reply #3 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:34:30 am »

Quote from: sporadic on August 11, 2011, 11:27:10 am

The last four holes on that course can create some serious carnage.

But he was something like +11 even before he got there. Now he's +15 through 17. It apparently wasn't just one huge misadventure, but a bunch doubles and triples. It's hard to imagine after watching him last week.

Bench · « **Reply #4 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:43:58 am »

Quote from: sporadic on August 11, 2011, 11:25:51 am

Foley is a complete dipshit, how a PGA tour pro would allow him within 100 feet of them is beyond me.

Tiger's not really making very good decisions these days. Bringing Bell in as his new caddy is moronic. He needs Barkley to slap some sense into him, but refuses to return any phone calls.

Limey · « **Reply #5 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:48:32 am »

Quote from: Bench on August 11, 2011, 11:43:58 am

Tiger's not really making very good decisions these days. Bringing Bell in as his new caddy is moronic. He needs Barkley to slap some sense into him, but refuses to return any phone calls.

I believe he prefers to text rather than take calls.

sporadic · « **Reply #6 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:50:36 am »

Quote from: austro on August 11, 2011, 11:34:30 am

But he was something like +11 even before he got there. Now he's +15 through 17. It apparently wasn't just one huge misadventure, but a bunch doubles and triples. It's hard to imagine after watching him last week.

He started on the back nine, was +2 entering "the Gauntlet", +9 upon exit

austro · « **Reply #7 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:55:26 am »

Quote from: sporadic on August 11, 2011, 11:50:36 am

He started on the back nine, was +2 entering "the Gauntlet", +9 upon exit

Ahh, that makes more sense. Thanks.

Limey · « **Reply #8 on:** August 11, 2011, 11:58:15 am »

Quote from: sporadic on August 11, 2011, 11:25:51 am

Anyone watching live stream of the "featured group". Three years ago would you have ever thought that Davis Love III would be the premier player in a Love/Woods/Harrington threesome?

I'm hoping that the switch to the McIlroy / Clark / Schwartzel group going off at 12;45 CDT. Weird that the three current holders of the other majors are in the same group.

sporadic · « **Reply #9 on:** August 11, 2011, 12:00:24 pm »

Quote from: austro on August 11, 2011, 11:55:26 am

Ahh, that makes more sense. Thanks.

The guys on "Live from the PGA" were talking about the closing stretch last night, how a guy could easily make multiple big numbers. Guess they were spot on.

sporadic · « **Reply #10 on:** August 11, 2011, 12:02:49 pm »

Quote from: Limey on August 11, 2011, 11:58:15 am

I'm hoping that the switch to the McIlroy / Clark / Schwartzel group going off at 12;45 CDT. Weird that the three current holders of the other majors are in the same group.

I think that is SOP for the PGA

sporadic · « **Reply #11 on:** August 11, 2011, 12:31:19 pm »

Quote from: Limey on August 11, 2011, 11:58:15 am

I'm hoping that the switch to the McIlroy / Clark / Schwartzel group going off at 12;45 CDT. Weird that the three current holders of the other majors are in the same group.

you got it

Bench · « **Reply #12 on:** August 11, 2011, 12:46:10 pm »

Quote from: Limey on August 11, 2011, 11:58:15 am

Weird that the three current holders of the other majors are in the same group.

I thought they always did that in the PGA?

austro · « **Reply #13 on:** August 11, 2011, 01:54:25 pm »

Rory hit his tee shot on 3 over where I would be, tried to play a ball through a tree root, and fucked up his wrist. He doesn't look comfortable taking full swings, and I'll be surprised if he finishes the round.

sporadic · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2011, 10:07:48 am »

Ricky Barnes is a tough as a $2 steak. He may not play all that well at the John Deere classics of the tour world, but dude shows up to play at tough tracks (I think that this track qualifies as tough for all those not named Steve Stricker).

Lurch · « **Reply #15 on:** August 12, 2011, 10:16:32 am »

Quote from: sporadic on August 12, 2011, 10:07:48 am

Ricky Barnes is a tough as a $2 steak. He may not play all that well at the John Deere classics of the tour world, but dude shows up to play at tough tracks (I think that this track qualifies as tough for all those not named Steve Stricker).

What would a 15 handicap shoot on this course? 130?

Limey · « **Reply #16 on:** August 12, 2011, 10:58:06 am »

Quote from: Lurch on August 12, 2011, 10:16:32 am

What would a 15 handicap shoot on this course? 130?

What's the rating off the tips?

sporadic · « **Reply #17 on:** August 12, 2011, 11:03:33 am »

Quote from: Lurch on August 12, 2011, 10:16:32 am

What would a 15 handicap shoot on this course? 130?

That all depends. The rough there is not very penal, or does not look to be. If you putt fast greens well and don't try to hit a hazard fronted green from 260 you probably would not see too much drop off. May even play better as I cannot see a bad lie on that place, it looks immaculate. The pros struggle because they cannot lay up on 260 yard par threes, or NOT go for it from 230 on number 18, lending themselves to the possibility of a big hole. For reference, the old "WULAWHORN" from the OWA days was anywhere from 10-15 handicapper, depending on the day you caught him. He played Torrey Pines a few years back and shot 86 or 88, I believe. Torrey is REALLY hard for the pros...he said it was so hard he ended up having wedges into a lot of par 4's (after having to lay up when missing fairways or being confronted with REALLY hard approaches), so he just bogeyed the place to death. Because of the conservative route he was forced to take, his score did not suffer much.

sporadic · « **Reply #18 on:** August 12, 2011, 11:10:33 am »

Quote from: Limey on August 12, 2011, 10:58:06 am

What's the rating off the tips?

YOWSERS, rating is 77 from the tips (if you believe Wikipedia)

Limey · « **Reply #19 on:** August 12, 2011, 03:59:15 pm »

Projected cut is +4, and some people are finished at that score. That means the cut can't be at a higher score, right? I.e. if you're finished at +5, you're done.

austro · « **Reply #20 on:** August 12, 2011, 04:04:04 pm »

Quote from: Limey on August 12, 2011, 03:59:15 pm

Projected cut is +4, and some people are finished at that score. That means the cut can't be at a higher score, right? I.e. if you're finished at +5, you're done.

No, I would imagine that if Stricker et al come back to the field somewhat, the cut could move up. Depends on the distribution of scores.

Limey · « **Reply #21 on:** August 12, 2011, 04:09:28 pm »

Quote from: austro on August 12, 2011, 04:04:04 pm

No, I would imagine that if Stricker et al come back to the field somewhat, the cut could move up. Depends on the distribution of scores.

Yeah. I should know this, but I'm trying to get my tired head around the logic. If a bunch of golfers +4 or better fall back down the board, then the "70 and ties" can be worse than +4. It has nothing to do with the leader's score, and everything to do with the score of the dude sitting at 70th.

austro · « **Reply #22 on:** August 12, 2011, 04:16:01 pm »

Quote from: Limey on August 12, 2011, 04:09:28 pm

Yeah. I should know this, but I'm trying to get my tired head around the logic. If a bunch of golfers +4 or better fall back down the board, then the "70 and ties" can be worse than +4. It has nothing to do with the leader's score, and everything to do with the score of the dude sitting at 70th.

If it's just "top 70 and ties", then yes, you're right (unless there are exactly 70 people at +4 and lower and then Stricker goes and pulls an Ishikawa). If it's "top 70 and ties plus anybody within 10 strokes of the leader", then Stricker's performance is relevant. I believe the Masters uses a cut rule similar to the latter; I don't know what the PGA uses.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #23 on:** August 12, 2011, 04:17:37 pm »

If there are 70 people done better than +4, then it can't be higher than that. I don't know if that's the case now.

Limey · « **Reply #24 on:** August 12, 2011, 04:32:52 pm »

It's simply 70th and ties. It currently remains at +4 as +5 is good for T82. If 12 golfers slide from better than +4 to worse than +4, the cut line will move.

I think I'm getting this now...

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #25 on:** August 14, 2011, 05:42:47 pm »

Dufner imploding

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #26 on:** August 14, 2011, 05:48:32 pm »

Extremely impressive finish for keegan after triple bogey on 15